IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rfinst/v29y2016i1p5-68..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Editor's Choice … and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns

Author

Listed:
  • Campbell R. Harvey
  • Yan Liu
  • Heqing Zhu

Abstract

Hundreds of papers and factors attempt to explain the cross-section of expected returns. Given this extensive data mining, it does not make sense to use the usual criteria for establishing significance. Which hurdle should be used for current research? Our paper introduces a new multiple testing framework and provides historical cutoffs from the first empirical tests in 1967 to today. A new factor needs to clear a much higher hurdle, with a t-statistic greater than 3.0. We argue that most claimed research findings in financial economics are likely false. Received October 22, 2014; accepted June 15, 2015 by Editor Andrew Karolyi.

Suggested Citation

  • Campbell R. Harvey & Yan Liu & Heqing Zhu, 2016. "Editor's Choice … and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 5-68.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rfinst:v:29:y:2016:i:1:p:5-68.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rfs/hhv059
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Lists

    This item is featured on the following reading lists, Wikipedia, or ReplicationWiki pages:
    1. Meta-Research in Economics

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rfinst:v:29:y:2016:i:1:p:5-68.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfsssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.